View report page

168
imaginary difficulties, but because such difficulties
actually exist, because they are often brought under
my notice, and because the suggested arguments
have actually been urged successfully against the
action of Sanitary Officers. And, indeed, I do not
hesitate to assert that a thoughtful and experienced
expert would, on these and such like grounds, often
hesitate or refuse to institute proceedings against
property which the casual philanthropic visitor would
at once condemn, and the condition of which he
might adduce and picture as evidence of gross
neglect.
One important object of the Nuisances Removal
Acts is the abatement or suppression of trades
nuisances. It must be recollected, however, that
excepting certain offensive businesses which are now
under regulation by the Metropolitan Board of
Works, all that can in most cases be required is that
the best practicable means shall be adopted to
minimise the nuisance they create, and that hence in
many cases more or less nuisance becomes permissible
by law. But, oddly enough, the Nuisances
Removal Act of 1855, which gives these powers,
contains also a clause which neutralises them in
respect of a whole group of offensive trades; and
oddly, too, this exclusion is buried in a clause, the